You may have noticed that I've stopped calling King County "Ukraine County".
The people of Ukraine have taken their democracy back. It would be an insult to the proud and heroic Ukrainians to equate them with King County.
UPDATE: To answer the questions from various commenters whether we should remove the orange banner at the top of the page -- of course not. We learn from the example of the Ukrainians and fight to defend our own democracy just like they did.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at December 30, 2004 03:17 PM | Email ThisNow all that's left is for us to be further embarrassed by Iraq at the end of next month.
Posted by: Kevin S on December 30, 2004 03:25 PMA letter telling me when I could get the records mind you, not the actual records theselves.
Just keeps getting better and better, the Democrats must be shreading and photocopying like crazy.
KC website has a chinese page, would be interesting to see if any of the "Out of state" voters actually lived in China.
Someone should register the communist party leaders and see if it goes through. Probably without a hitch.
Posted by: Todd on December 30, 2004 03:49 PM"The dogged efforts of Viktor Yanukovych to overturn his defeat in the re-run Ukrainian election ended in failure yesterday, paving the way for Viktor Yushchenko, his liberal opponent, to be declared the official winner. The Supreme Court and the Central Election Commission rejected all of the Prime Minister’s complaints about the election on Sunday, which Mr Yushchenko, the opposition leader, won by 2.3 million votes.And so on..."Mr Yanukovych plans to appeal, but the decisions effectively remove the final obstacle to Mr Yushchenko’s inauguration on January 14, the grand finale of the “orange revolution” that swept Ukraine out of Russia’s strategic embrace and into the arms of the West.
"Mr Yanukovych says that he was robbed of victory by a Western-funded coup this month, when the Supreme Court overturned his win in the first running of the second round amid massive opposition protests over election fraud.
"He accuses his opponents of rigging the results of the re-run on Sunday by depriving around 4.8 million people of the right to vote, including many elderly and disabled."
Mr. Yanukovych sounds an awful lot like Mr. Rossi. Perhaps they should have yet another election to get things straight. Best of three. Mr. Rossi seems to believe that's how the counting works.
Oh, and this is a riot, from Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=aL0Xx9QOnYGA&refer=top_world_news):
"``At this point we don't know who won,'' Mary Lane, a spokeswoman for Rossi, said in a telephone interview from campaign headquarters in Bellevue. ``Dino won the first two counts. He just barely didn't win the third count. And with all the problems we've seen with King County and across the state, it would be wrong for him to concede.''"Correct me if I'm wrong, but he also "just barely" won those first two counts, the second one being even closer than the "third" count (note, Lane can't bring herself to say "final") he "just barely" didn't win.
Actually, seems like she just completely justified having the second recount with her statement.
Yet back on Dec 4th, Lane said about Gregoire asking for a second recount while asking for her to concede: "We are not going to let this stand. We will not let her try to steal this election."
Stefan may not like it, but a lot that stinks about this election has been the rhetoric bounced around by representatives of both candidates. It has been terribly devoid of reasonable and consistent dialog. That's what Kate Riley was on about. No wonder people hate politics and think politicians are slimey.
Posted by: Daniel K. on December 30, 2004 04:27 PMThey were talking this morning on Kirby's show about tying orange ribbons on to antennas. I'm all for it!
Posted by: megs on December 30, 2004 04:31 PMI think you are incorrect. The Rossi campaign has maintained the whole time that they want a fair and honest count...by following the RULES. Those should still apply in this day and age, even though they seem to be ignored when convenient.
Now, it's Rossi's responsibility to contest this election if there is evidence of a) intentional fruad or b) such total and complete incompetence that felons, illegals, and non-registered people were allowed to vote.
I have no doubt that were there a new election that Dino would win...even on the fairly liberal www.nwcn.com survey, 64% think there should be a new election. Sounds good to me.
Posted by: megs on December 30, 2004 04:37 PMI agree with you...the tsunami is a big story. But aside from giving money, there's not much else we can do (unless you've got some special skills needed over there). We also have to take care of ourselves here. To me, the future of our state is at stake.
I've lived almost my entire adult life under a Democrat run state. I'd like to see Washington get out from that strangle-hold. Absolute power corrupts absolutely...as the saying goes. It's time for some fresh blood.
Posted by: megs on December 30, 2004 04:46 PMOf course the Rs are not interested in following the rules...if the rules result in the R candidate losing...following the rules was just fine when R was ahead.
Of course...the Ds do the same. Both act the way the others would and DID when roles are reversed -- yet both sides said they wouldn't.
The wonderful thing about having a recount change the winner is that the total hyporcrisy on both sides is exposed for all to see ("tied race" - hah!; "concede" - hah!)
I hope the owner of this website continues with the outrageous comparison. It just shines light on the true nature of the partisans.
Posted by: tom on December 30, 2004 04:47 PMAlso, if CG's claim that 261 votes is essentially a tie, then you'd think that her 130 votes is even more so and that she'd want a rematch ... if only to provide more political backing to her "victory".
Your condescension for the legal manuevering going on now doesn't help you win any arguments. There are legitimate arguments for letting the election stand, but I haven't see you present anything reasonable so far.
And how is copying and pasting some text considered "Very well researched"...seems like a lot less work than that of the owners of this website.
Posted by: megs on December 30, 2004 04:54 PMWhy should Rossi concede? Gregoire didn't concede when the count was against her, in counts that were more accurate than this mishandled, riddled with irregularities, dictated by incompetence third count.
Face it, Gregoire's a slick attorney and knows the ins and outs of making the guilty look innocent. Do you HONESTLY want a lawyer running the state? Especially a lawyer that gives preferential treatment to voters of ONE county, while disregarding the other 38 counties?
We've nearly lost boeing, medical professionals are leaving the state--just what we need to bury us even deeper in economic mismanagement is an attorney at the helm. Are you so partisan that you can't even see what harm a Gregoire governorship can do?
Posted by: noel on December 30, 2004 04:56 PMDoes that mean you are in favor of either the US President or at least one house of congress being Democrat instead of the current "strangle-hold" of the Republicans on the national level?
Or is it just the Democrats that have the strangle-hold...when Republicans have complete control of the executive and leglislative it's something else?
And, by the way, the Republicans controlled the state senate for the past several years....not quite a strangle hold. That's where "the outsider" Rossi got all his power...very impressive for an outsider to wield such power from the inside.
Posted by: tom on December 30, 2004 04:58 PMWell taken point about legitimate arguments. I am just so fed up with the way both sides are using "legitimate arguments" to support their side in a way lawyers do (or talk show hosts): conveniently telling one side of the story as if it's gospel and using strong suggestive tones to suggest the other's equally legimiate arguments are not only biased, but possibly illegal ("stealing the election," "fraud"). This applies to the Ds as well since a number suggested Rossi was trying to steal the election as well.
You are correct about some Rs calling for a revote before the 2nd recount was finalized..but all predictions, experts, discussions, etc. predicted CG would take the lead after the 2nd recount was finalized. Wasn't much of a stretch there.
The most impressive person in all this is Sam Reed. Here's an R who truly is putting his job first; his partisanship second. This has resulted in him being attacked by both sides (first as he sided with Rossi on the ballots in KC and second as he certified the election saying it was fair).
I'm delighted we didn't have a repeat of the Florida Secy of State fiasco here....
Fedup: I said there was hyprocisy on both sides as both are doing what the others did when the roles were reversed...it can't be any clearer.
Posted by: tom on December 30, 2004 05:06 PMI used to respect Sam Reed until this whole fiasco. He is ultimately responsible for the quality of the electoral process in Washington, and it is so foul it smells like a beach in Sri Lanka right now.
I think Sam Reed is in full CYA mode right now. He's starting to dance faster than the music is playing.
Posted by: Larry on December 30, 2004 05:10 PMAnd I'm not saying there should never be a totally Republican or Democrat government...but after 20 years of a Democrat governor this state has extremely high taxes, an unfriendly business environment, and a ridiculously bloated bureaucracy.
I worked for the State for several years and most appointed roles are 'friends' or 'pals' or somehow acquainted with the Governor ... I'm not saying this doesn't happen with Republican leadership ... just that it happens.
So, after 20 years these folks are afraid for their jobs if a Republican governor were to come in and clean house. These people are (for the most part, with a few rare exceptions) no longer public servants interested in the will of the people, but rather lifelong government workers trying to hold on to their cushy jobs (although cushy isn't the right word...it's the best I could think of...perhaps secure is better).
My uncle works in a very high leadership role. He expects that if a Republican comes into office he will no longer have his appointed position. He's one of the few who doesn't necessarily care, because he knows that despite the difficulty it would place on him temporarily, it would be better for the state in the long run.
I hope you answer some of noel's points as well.
Posted by: megs on December 30, 2004 05:11 PMI agree. I thought Sam was a fair and objective person, but it seems as though he's more concerned about getting it over with than fighting for what is right...not to mention the credibility of his office. Isn't it his job to make sure the elections systems are fair and that the rules followed?
Seems that someone hasn't been sending King County to the corner enough.
Posted by: megs on December 30, 2004 05:13 PMAs for meg's comments about my copying and pasting, and the work of the owners of this site, I don't think tom was making the insinuation she is asking about, and certainly I greatly respect the effort that has been made by those that maintain and contribute to this site. Would that I could do so well with mine.
Not sure being a commercial real estate agent is better preparation for the realities of politics than law school. After all, politicians are law makers.
Posted by: Daniel K. on December 30, 2004 05:15 PMI meant no insult to you...I have no problem with copying/pasting. I was trying to show that research is something else entirely.
I disagree that law school is necessarily good preparation for politics. Although it's not necessarily bad either. I've never been through any type of law school or course, but I did major in Political Science. Even that doesn't really prepare you for politics...after all, most of the material is left-wing anyway. ;-) Took me a couple years to figure that one out.
Anyway, I didn't think the tsunami comment was a big deal, except that it seemed like an attempt to belittle the importance of our own situation here.
Posted by: megs on December 30, 2004 05:19 PMYour comparison is ridiculous. Your precious Democrats have run Washington for the lion's share of the period from 1932 until Bush's election in 2000, which was the first time in my life of nearly 50 years that we had a Republican President and Republican Congress. The jackasses ran the U.S. House for 40 years before they were finally tossed out of power in 1994. You had your chance and you had it for a damn, long time. Now that we've had barely 10 years of a Republican Congress after a lifetime of Democratic rule, you think we gotta give it back to the Democrats cause we've been in power too long? How greedy can you get?
Ken
Posted by: Ken Hupp on December 30, 2004 05:20 PMWhat say Seattle or Olympia adopts Kiev as our 'Sister City', or Washington adopts the Ukraine as our 'Sister State'?
Any rallies or protests between here an Olympia, I'll be there with Orange on!
Posted by: Larry on December 30, 2004 05:21 PMFree Republic?
Posted by: South County on December 30, 2004 05:23 PMBravo! Thanks for backing up my points with some more concrete facts. Much appreciated.
Posted by: megs on December 30, 2004 05:23 PMThere is a HUGE untapped sentiment of frustration out there among the WA electorate.
Many people are now as "mad as hell" or at least willing to show up for a peaceful protest in Olympia.
I'll organize this if I can get support from Shark to post the where, when, etc.
I'm working on a .PDF file that you can print from your own printer that simply spells out RE-VOTE! with an orange background. Everyone can make signs and show up. Wear your orange!
When a date is set, talk radio will be notified as well.
Washington deserves the truth. Re-Contest!
Posted by: Jeff B. on December 30, 2004 05:32 PMDon't even get me started with how unfunded mandates from D.C. have affected things nationwide.
Posted by: Daniel K. on December 30, 2004 05:33 PMJust don't spam every thread with the same comment!
Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on December 30, 2004 05:34 PMI agree completely with appointed people losing their "public servant" mentality in favor of keeping and doling out power. I happen to believe the same is true of elected officials. And I agree that it happens regardless of party.
With a huge majority of elected officials getting re-elected, the problem continues. I'm a huge fan of term limits for just that reason. The US House, for example, was created to turn over every 2 years to reflect the continuing changing will of the people. Naturally, that hasn't happened...with folks gathering power through longevity and knocking off incumbents is often a fool's errand. Our state house is set up the same way, yet incumbent after incumbent gets re-elected, power gets magnified and the dominos fall from there.
About the insane taxes here, are you talking business taxes? I've seen studies that show Washington taxpayers toward the top as well as research that shows taxpayers toward the bottom of all states. Seems another case of using statistics selecively to make one's case.
To Noel's point about a lawyer running the state. I don't care...I was someone with integrity, intelligence, fair-mindedness and someone who can bring people together in a Reagan/Clinton sense.
I believe neither CG or DR has anything close to these qualities...but being a lawyer is neither good nor bad in this area. Frankly, a guy with minimal business experience doesn't exude any more confidence than a lifetime lawyer.
Also to the question of concession, the only reason Rossi could concede is for consistency (he wanted CG to concede in similar circumstances). Of course, no one would believe he would do such a thing..when he still holds a shot at being governor...what politician would willingly give up such an opportunity?
Posted by: tom on December 30, 2004 05:36 PMIt looks to me like your points are very well expressed, but glad to contribute. All these developments over the WA Governor's race is making me wish I was still living there. Thanks Shark, and everybody who maintains this site for doing such a great job so that us ex-Seattlites
(I probably didn't even spell it right!) can keep up with this.
Ken
Posted by: Ken Hupp on December 30, 2004 05:37 PMEvery regulation is a tax. For example, the recent passing of the 65-10 law would not be considered a 'tax', yet it devalues the property of certain rural King County landowners. The more regulations you put on something, the less it is worth.
I may be wrong, but I think Washington is over-regulated, both for individuals and businesses. That's why Boeing moved out, and that's why more businesses will follow if Gregoire gets in office.
Posted by: Larry on December 30, 2004 05:39 PM:^)
You should run next time Tom!
Posted by: Daniel K. on December 30, 2004 05:39 PMIt is absolutely time to make our voices heard, even it if means postponing our lives for one day to head to Olympia.
Posted by: Jeff B. on December 30, 2004 05:42 PMSo, my comment about being highly taxed has mainly to do with perception...mine. I am the sole proprieter of a small business, and I work full time, and we own our home...all of these things relate to taxes.
I've also heard anecdotal stories of businesses (chains) that will not do business here because of the tax environment AND the over-regulation. Somehow I think the regulation is worse for businesses than the taxes.
Someone else is free to do actual research on this point. :-)
I have to pay some bills now. A businesswoman's work is never done.
Posted by: megs on December 30, 2004 05:43 PMYou are absolutely correct. Every regulation is a tax - it costs you money to follow the regulation, whether or not that money goes to the government.
Posted by: Larry on December 30, 2004 05:45 PMGreedy? Perhaps you mistake me for a partisan. I was just making a point of consistency. Both sides are the same this way.
On the federal level, for example, to hear esteemed Senator Hatch complain about blocked judges when his committee prevented Clinton nominees for years from even being discussed in committee is an example of the hyprocisy that runs through both parties.
Is either right? No. Give them power and they'll use it. And protect it. And relish it. Megs got it right...power corrupts. On both sides.
GO TERM LIMITS! Nethercutt had it right...until he let the power corrupt him too.
Weird that we have term limits for the presidency...do you think partisanship was instrumental in having that amendment passed???
Finally, the two parties are very much alike in one way: SPEND. They both love to SPEND our money. The difference is democrats like to TAX and SPEND, while republicans like to BORROW and SPEND.
Thank goodness our state can't do the BORROW and SPEND stuff like the national government can....phew!
Posted by: tom on December 30, 2004 05:46 PMThe reason we have term limits on the Presidency:
FDR
Posted by: Larry on December 30, 2004 05:47 PMThat is exactly why we have businesses moving out, and not moving in.
Posted by: Larry on December 30, 2004 05:49 PMYet, I'm probably not going out on a limb by saying that somehow we all seem to rise above that burden because we all believe that Washington state is a great place to live, especially the beautiful Puget Sound area.
Meanwhile, to add to tom's remarks, if you haven't done so already, I highly recommend Peter Peterson's "Running on Empty", for, IMO, a fair indictment of both Democrats and Republicans spending habits.
Posted by: Daniel K. on December 30, 2004 05:55 PMI agree that I like living in WA, however I've lived here all my life so don't know much else. I expect that when I eventually agree with my husband to move that I'll like living 'there' just as much. There comes a point where it doesn't matter how nice a place is, if the burden to live there is too great...there's always somewhere else.
Posted by: megs on December 30, 2004 05:58 PMI obviously prefer neither, but if there is a need that must be addressed (i.e. war) I much prefer borrowing. If you want to donate more money to the government, feel free, but I believe I am more capable of determining where to best spend my money.
I am in no way against all taxes. I believe the government is responsible for infrastructure and protection (roads, fire, police) and the rest should be left up to the local jurisdictions.
And I will mention that I used to be of the mindset that 'the government knows how to spend it better'...that is when I worked for the State and my paycheck depended on those taxes rolling in. :-) And it was also before my transformation from left wing femini-nazi to right leaning, moderately feminist woman. :-)
HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!
Posted by: megs on December 30, 2004 06:01 PMI am actually with you on the term limits. It appears to me that some of the best elected officials we've had recently have been those who abided by the term limits. I wish that George Nethercutt had done that, because I do feel he bargained away a powerful argument when he backed away. On the other hand, people like Tom Coburn, Jim DeMint and Governor Mark Sanford, who kept their term limits pledge came back later to run for a different office and were rewarded by being elected. The first two, just might do something about the spending, which does need to be brought under control. I hope I'm not violating any blog rules by asking this, but have you considered membership in the Club for Growth? They are a great advocate of some of the points you have been expressing?
Ken
Posted by: Ken Hupp on December 30, 2004 06:05 PMThat's all from me for now. I'm new to this place, but it has been a spirited discussion. Best wishes for 2005, may it be a better one than 2004.
Don't forget the old phrase: Audi et alteram partem. We all benefit from it.
See you on the other side, here, at my place, or at some other place.
Posted by: Daniel K. on December 30, 2004 06:10 PMUkraine isn't relevant. The principal things that are relevant are the two Federal cases: Bush v. Gore and Roe v. Alabama, and that's what will make Rossi governor.
Your cynicism and your nihilism and your moral relativism is repugnant.
Posted by: FedUpWithThis on December 30, 2004 06:12 PMThe Ukraine happens to be the subject of the posting this thread is commenting on. Not sure I deserve your descriptions of me, but fair enough, you are entitled to your opinion, and my publicly stated comments will surely invite others that disagree.
Posted by: Daniel K. on December 30, 2004 06:21 PMYou seem like a nice guy, but you speak like a Social!st.
"we all seem to rise above that burden because we all believe that Washington state is a great place to live"
No, we rise above that burden because we make more money and we're able to shoulder that burden. We are speaking of taxes and regulations, right?
Those who can't afford more taxes and more regulations move away, or don't move here in the first place. Obviously Boeing no longer thought that this was a great place to have their headquarters. Most international corporations would NEVER think of moving into this state. And if it weren't for the fact that Microsoft and Starbucks and Amazon et al were started here, they wouldn't be here either.
I totally agree that this is a great place to live, except for the local and state governments.
Posted by: Larry on December 30, 2004 06:49 PMThe Dems - didn't just use one method of fraud...they used EVERY method possible - as it became available! Heck - KC probably doesn't even remember everything they did in their rabid fervor to get Gregoire elected!
Shark...You should start a thread for ideas on what to look for in election fraud. We have so many people who were election observers with complaints of what they witnessed. Their complaints alone should give us ideas for investigation. Richard Pope also had a great audit list going...
We should place the ideas on one list and send it on to the Rossi camp...
Posted by: Deborah on December 30, 2004 07:45 PMBut labels can never capture every nuance of a person's political, moral, social and economic value system. Generally speaking I usually don't find a candidate offered up by either Democrats or Republicans that speak to all my concerns. Often I have to go with the one that champions the majority or most important of them. As I suspect is the case for most of us. Which is why left vs. right, Democrat vs. Republican, us vs. them demagoguery really bothers me. Unfortunately it's the tone of the times and unless something changes we're going to be stuck with it for many years to come.
The Blogosphere may even be a contributing factor inasmuch as it tends to magnify the highly opinionated voices, more than the moderate ones. That's just my unscientific feeling though.
Posted by: Daniel K. on December 30, 2004 07:46 PMSadly, our state has drifted away from "tax-and-spend" status to the lowest form called "tax-and-squander"!
Posted by: Mr. Cynical on December 30, 2004 07:53 PMLabels don't bother me - I don't change much, but my labels do.
When I lived in Chicago, I was a 'moderate', or an 'independent.' When I moved to Seattle, even though my opinions hadn't changed, I became a 'right-wing neocon nazi.' Such is life.
Posted by: Larry on December 30, 2004 07:53 PMYou talkin' to me, or Daniel K?
Posted by: Larry on December 30, 2004 08:31 PMI agree. People who think labels and generalizations are wrong are probably liberal; people who don't care about labels are probably conservative. Just a an observation from over the years.
Posted by: Larry on December 30, 2004 08:54 PMIs there any way you can argue a point without resorting to personal attacks? I think I've presented myself openly here, with my personal name, and attempted to back my arguments with explanations. All I've seen from you are one liner posts that attack or insult me.
Posted by: Daniel K. on December 30, 2004 08:55 PMYou slay me.
Posted by: Daniel K. on December 30, 2004 09:16 PMDD--
Did you realize that mixing Prozac and heavy pot-smoking can lead to early Alzheimer's? It can also lead to unbelievable fantasizing!
DD--look up in the sky..it's the mothership and they've come to beam you up!
It's only a democracy if the R's are running the show!
Those 1.4 million who voted for Chris Gregoire. They don't matter worth a damn in your eyes! And this is exactly why Gregoire should hang tough!
Sure she wasn't the most exciting candidate which is why a bunch of people who voted D down-ballot threw the lever to Rossi. How many of those folks you think give a damn about hypocROSSI or irreleVANCE now?
I'm happy you stopped calling King County Ukraine County. It was getting real tiresome.
Posted by: John on December 31, 2004 10:30 AM